4 ms·

> I don't really mean to speak against the checkpoints, I just wonder if "police state" has a clear enough definition to provide an interesting framework for di

by mpyne 12y ago

> I don't really mean to speak against the checkpoints, I just wonder if "police state" has a clear enough definition to provide an interesting framework for discussion of modern governments That's a really good point, but I suspect that those for whom 'police state' has the most meaning would also have the most incentive to keep the definition from ever getting too specific. That's not counting the idea that one person's "police state" is another person's "safe spot to raise my kids". But even non "police states" involve social control (e.g. against serial killing), there's no getting around that. Even anarchies involve social control—the members of each commune are expected to abide by the democratically-reached decisions. If I had to start on a definition I'd probably key off the difference between "social control for the benefit of the people/society" and "social control for the sole benefit of the government in power". There are implementations of sobriety checkpoints are not too hard to classify in the former.

maxerickson 12y ago
I don't think I've articulated it above, but there must be some way of separating out the police work that punishes actions that have clear negative consequences (murder, theft, etc) from the police work that punishes actions that tend to lead to negative consequences (said checkpoints).
- mpyne 12y ago
  Perhaps. But I wouldn't describe "preventative maintenance" by police as necessarily bad, if (and that's the big question) it can help avoid direct negative consequences down the road where those negative consequences outweigh the hassle of what they're doing. At some point living with other people will necessarily inconvenience you, whether it's sobriety checkpoints, or directing traffic, or jury dury, or voting, or taxes, or any of the dozens of other things that go into the civic duties of maintaining the general welfare. Obviously there's a balance that must be chosen (e.g. the speed traps in rural Georgia that are so dense that you have to assume they are more for revenue than for safety), but I don't think police activity only becomes legitimate when it's directly focused on a specific and known criminal occurrence.
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    Right, I'm not questioning the legitimacy of the activity or trying to say that it is bad (or at least, I'm not real concerned with that here). I'm speculating that it is really only different from more dire authoritarianism in degree. If that's true, then we've essentially chosen a police state (it just happens to usually be friendly and reasonably egalitarian).
    - mpyne 12y ago
      > I'm speculating that it is really only different from more dire authoritarianism in degree. If that's the case, then everything is authoritarianism (to some degree) and then Syndrome's quote from The Incredibles applies.

by mpyne 12y ago

maxerickson 12y ago

I don't think I've articulated it above, but there must be some way of separating out the police work that punishes actions that have clear negative consequences (murder, theft, etc) from the police work that punishes actions that tend to lead to negative consequences (said checkpoints).

mpyne 12y ago
Perhaps. But I wouldn't describe "preventative maintenance" by police as necessarily bad, if (and that's the big question) it can help avoid direct negative consequences down the road where those negative consequences outweigh the hassle of what they're doing. At some point living with other people will necessarily inconvenience you, whether it's sobriety checkpoints, or directing traffic, or jury dury, or voting, or taxes, or any of the dozens of other things that go into the civic duties of maintaining the general welfare. Obviously there's a balance that must be chosen (e.g. the speed traps in rural Georgia that are so dense that you have to assume they are more for revenue than for safety), but I don't think police activity only becomes legitimate when it's directly focused on a specific and known criminal occurrence.
- maxerickson 12y ago
  Right, I'm not questioning the legitimacy of the activity or trying to say that it is bad (or at least, I'm not real concerned with that here). I'm speculating that it is really only different from more dire authoritarianism in degree. If that's true, then we've essentially chosen a police state (it just happens to usually be friendly and reasonably egalitarian).
  - mpyne 12y ago
    > I'm speculating that it is really only different from more dire authoritarianism in degree. If that's the case, then everything is authoritarianism (to some degree) and then Syndrome's quote from The Incredibles applies.